Ever
since Vladimir Putin announced Moscow's intention of creating the Eurasian Union, Western
officials have been scurrying to figure out an effective
way to derail it. Now that the proposed Moscow-led economic pact
seems to be getting closer to becoming a reality, the West is predictably going into a panic
mode.

For generations, one of the Western world's primordial fears has been the
rise of a powerful Eastern bloc that would compete against it
politically, militarily and economically. While the Soviet Union was a serious political and military rival, it was nevertheless not an effective economic one and as a result it did not last very long. The
Russian Federation today has the - full potential - and in fact seems to be steadily heading towards becoming a serious political, military and economic rival for the
West. Moreover, recent years has seen the evolution of good bilateral relations between Moscow and the world's second largest economy, Beijing. In fact, as Chinese-American relations continues to worsen, Chinese-Russian relations have never been better and continues to get better with each passing year.In today's US Dollar saturated toxic global landscape where the Western world is unfortunately the financial, political and cultural pivot around which the rest of the world is forced to rotate, the creation of a major, independent economic pact free of Western control like the one proposed by Moscow may in fact prove deadly for the Anglo-American-Zionist global order. Western high officials fully recognize this.

The following blog commentary from about one year ago delves further into the topic of the Eurasian Union -

The phobia for Western policymakers is derived from their geostrategic calculations and forecasts. There have been tectonic political shifts taking place around the world in recent years. The Western elite, both political and financial, are seriously worried that their centuries old global dominance may be coming to an end. This fundamental fear of theirs is being expressed by their tireless efforts to preserve their hegemony around the world through the use of psy-ops, economic blackmail and military force. This effort to preserve Western power and wealth actually lies at the very root of most of the bloodletting we have been witnessing take place around the world in recent years. In fact, Washington's actions in places such as the south Caucasus, Russia, Serbia, China, Venezuela, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria and Iran should be looked at from this perspective.The following commentaries about Cold War II and Western Globalism are in many ways related to this topic -

It's very amusing that after many years of ignoring, by-passing and being down-right hostile to Armenia, Western officials have all of a sudden started pandering to Armenians now that Moscow has begun seriously promoting the Eurasian Union in Yerevan. See the articles towards the bottom of this page, all of a sudden Western officials are talking about serious economic matters with Yerevan. This approach is somewhat similar to how in the late 1990s they got Armenians all excited by suggesting that they are interested in seriously investing in Armenia's automotive industry... only to later make the proposition contingent upon settling the Nagorno Karabakh dispute ultimately in Baku's favor.

The Carrot and Fear Approach

Their countermeasures against Moscow have been two-pronged within Armenia. Because they realize that their favorite carrot and stick approach (namely the stick part) will not work against Armenia because of Yerevan's military alliance with Moscow, they are instead using the carrot and fear approach. In addition to dangling imaginary carrots in front of starving
Armenians, Western officials have had their assets in Armenia - Richard Giragosian, Raffi Hovanissian, Ara Manoogian, Paruyr
Hayrikian, Ara Papyan, Vartan Oskanian and a number of Western
funded propaganda outlets - come out make predictions of doom. Washington's operatives have been warning the
Armenian sheeple that joining the Moscow-led Eurasian Union will be
tantamount to taking Armenia back to the Soviet era - or worst!

Predictably, Washington's operatives in Yerevan are terrified that Armenia will join the Eurasian Union
and as a result become immune to Western political manipulation and economic
blackmail. They are afraid that with closer integration with the Russian Federation, Armenia
will no longer be a staging ground for Western activists. As a result, they are out in force and they are trying to scare the Armenian sheeple about getting too close to Moscow.

Naturally,
the Whore of Babylon could not stay quiet. Clinton recently
warned of the "Sovietization of Former USSR States" by Moscow. The news
article in question as well as several other related articles are posted below this commentary. Please read them all because the tone of their content are revealing signals from the Western
press that the Moscow-led Eurasian Union is indeed getting closer to reality.

Incidentally, some of the people who are currently voicing their opposition to Armenia's membership in the Eurasian Union (e.g. Ara Papyan) also want to keep the Turkish-Armenian border
closed at all costs (even though Turkish goods keep freely pouring into Armenia via Georgia) . Although I don't
necessarily agree with keeping the Armenian-Turkish border shut (since Turkish goods keep coming into Armenia at a higher cost because of the Georgian middleman), I do
nevertheless understand their sentiment regarding this very sensitive matter. But now, some of the same people that want to see Armenia's
borders with Turkey closed also
want Armenia closed to Russia!?

Are these people happy that Armenia
is stagnating in its landlocked, remote and impoverished mountain prison, or do they think that the European Union is going to somehow come to Armenia's rescue?Our EUrotic idiots

Strangely, many Armenians today continue to think that the European Union is the answer to all of Armenia's ailments, even as the union in question has been imploding. In other words, as Europeans themselves are seeking ways to abandon their sinking ship, Armenia's idiots are enthusiastically seeking ways of jumping onto it. Absolutely a brilliant display of Armenian-style politics!

Do Armenia's EUrotic idiots (many of whom claim that Moscow's Eurasian Union is no good because Armenia does not have a common border with Russia) realize that Armenia does not have a land
connection to the
European Union?

Do these people really think that the European Union is coming to the Caucasus?

Do these people really think that Georgia is going to last much
longer being a staging center for Western, Israeli and Turkish
interests?

Do these people really think that the European Union is going to last much longer?

Do these
people really think the European Union is the answer to all of Armenia's problems?

Have these
people been watching events taking place in Greece
and Spain?

Do we
want Armenia opening up to Europe, who's closest regional partner is Turkey or to Russia, who is Armenia's strategic partner? In fact, isn't
Russia Armenia's only ally?

Don't Russian
officials see Armenia as a
major strategic asset worthy of protection? Haven't Western powers traditionally been in bed with Armenia's enemies?

Isn't Russia Armenia's
largest trading partner, where Armenian products are well known and respected? Therefore, isn't Russia a massive market that is ideal for Armenian products?

Don't we have in Russia the largest and the
most
affluent Armenian diaspora, and one that is strategically situated to help Armenia both politically and economically?

Isn't Armenia closer to Russia - geographically and
culturally - than to Europe or America?

The case I just briefly outlined for joining the Moscow-led Eurasian Union may sound very logical and
compelling, but for some strange reason a lot of this obvious logic
and political wisdom seems to be escaping many Armenians. It may be the
genetic trait I keep writing about that causes Armenians to be
politically illiterate and self-destructive; the genetic trait that makes Armenians look at
an old enemy like the West and somehow sees a friend and when looking at
a natural friend like Russia somehow sees an enemy.

This is the bottom line: Geographically, economically, culturally and
genetically, Armenia is a Eurasian nation. Armenians need to wake up
from their silly EUrotic fantasies and realize that the economic pact
proposed by Moscow is where Armenia rightfully and naturally belongs!

Although
Armenia has a not so little army of Washingtonian whores trying to
drive a wedge between Yerevan and Moscow and sabotage anything that would genuinely help move the embattled nation forward in
the much troubled region, I predict Armenia will sooner-than-later find
itself in the Moscow-led Eurasian Union - as soon as the obstacle known as Tbilisi is negotiated.Encouragingly, there are clear signs today that Tbilisi and Moscow are in the long overdue process of ironing out their problems. Therefore, while the south
Caucasus gradually heads towards a Russianimposed peace and Armenia
heads towards the Eurasian Union, Armenian officials need to in the
meanwhile stop undermining the young and impressionable republic's future by
foolishly accepting loans from Western money cartels and by allowing
subversive Western-funded NGOs and individuals to open shop in Armenia.

The Caucasus needs Pax Russica

Not through democracy; not
through an anti-corruption campaign; not through gay-rights; and not
even through Turkish-Armenian reconciliation will Armenia be able to
remedy its many sociopolitical and socioeconomic ailments. Attempting to tackle Armenia's many domestic troubles as the region's geopolitical climate remains as it currently is would be an utter waste of time, and may even in fact be counterproductive.

Armenia's main problems aregeopolitical, geographical and cultural in nature. Armenians need to recognize this and they need to fully rewire their thinking when it comes to matters pertaining to Armenia. The current approach taken by Armenia's Western-led political opposition is an attempt to fix this or that problem without seriously addressing the fundamental/core flaws the nation faces. At best, this Western-inspired approach is tactical in nature, i.e. short-term and most times shortsighted. The approach should instead be strategic, i.e. a long-term/farsighted approach to remedy the nation's ailments at its very source.

In other words, Armenians need to begin thinking not in the tactical terms of how many mouths to feed or what this or that "oligarch" is doing, but in the strategic terms of how to free the nation from its landlocked and blockaded mountain prison.

Enter Russia: Surrounded by genocidal enemies, the Russian nation has been, currently is and will continue being for the foreseeable future the single most crucial political player for Armenia. In a strong sense, Russia is the alpha and omega of Armenian politics. While this may put fear in some, it gives me hope. For the first time in perhaps well over one thousand years, Armenia's existence - as a nation-state in a very hostile political environment - serves the strategic interests of a major regional superpower. As long as Turkic peoples, Islmaists and the Anglo-American-Zionist alliance threatens the south Caucasus, Armenia will continue playing a very powerful role in the highest offices of the Russian Federation.

Although many Armenians today are blind to it, I see Russia's role in regional politics an opportunity of historic proportions for Armenia.It
is very important for Armenian military commanders to continue
maintaining a combat state-of-readiness in Armenia and Artsakh, and it
is even more important for Armenian officials to seek ways of becoming a
ubiquitous presence within the walls of the Kremlin.

While Armenia's military is Yerevan's tactical advantage, Armenia's alliance with the Russian Federation must be its strategic advantage!

For
once, Armenians need to start using their world-renown brains to fully
exploit Armenia's strategic relations with the Bear. For once, Armenians need to stop admiring Jews and start acting like them.At the end of the day, however, only through
the establishment of PaxRussica will the greater Caucasus region once
again enjoy peace and prosperity and will Armenia's renewed existence as a nation-state in the south Caucasus be ensured.

Arevordi

December, 2012

***

Russia: Introducing the Putin Doctrine

Six months after returning to power
in the face of mounting opposition, Russian President Vladimir Putin is
exercising his political capital—and doing so in imperial fashion. The
most recent example: earlier this month, sitting at a small table in his
ornate, oak-walled office in the Kremlin, Putin announced that Russia
was creating the world’s largest publicly traded oil company. The goal:
to restore the glory of Russia the only way Putin seems to know how—the
raw acquisition of power. “He is trying to keep stability, as he sees
it, with billions of dollars in oil,” said Evgeny Gontmakher, an analyst
at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, a
Moscow-based think tank. “I predict chaos.”

The
announcement—which featured what appeared to be a staged tête-à-tête
with one of the president’s advisers—seemed to crystallize what analysts
are now calling “The Putin Doctrine.” Its essence is to consolidate
political control at home and expand his country’s influence in Central
Asia at the expense of the West. Earlier this year, as protesters
crowded Moscow’s cold streets, demonstrating against the government in a
way that hasn’t been seen in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union,
Putin said his third term would give rise to a stronger military,
improved social programs, and the creation of a Eurasian Union, a
confederacy of states that resembles a watered-down version of the old
USSR.

Apparently
he wasn’t bluffing. Once the protests faded, Putin announced that he
would boost the Russian Army’s budget from $61 billion in 2012 to $97
billion by 2015. Last month, he flew to Tajikistan and extended the
lease on three Russian military bases for 30 years. Meanwhile, the
Russian Air Force has begun joint exercises with its counterparts in
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, and a special Kremlin committee
is mulling the best ways for the country to further unite with its
neighbors in Central Asia: “We take the Putin Doctrine as verbatim
instructions for how to create revolutionary change,” said Yuri Krupnov,
a Kremlin adviser who is trying to invest $12 billion in state money
into the economy of Tajikistan.

On
the domestic front, Putin appears eager to destroy his opponents. Over
the past year, he has relied on a loose coalition of nationalists,
secret service agents, and the hierarchy of the Orthodox Church to crush
dissenters, including opposition figures, human-rights groups, and even
musicians such as Pussy Riot, a group whose members were sent to
prison—and later the penal colonies—for performing a punk protest song
in Moscow’s main cathedral. Every week, street protesters who chant
slogans like “Putin is a thief!” in Moscow and other major cities are
questioned by police or thrown in jail. The regime is unapologetic about
the crackdown. “Everyone is sick and tired of this issue of human
rights,” Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov, recently told The New York Times. “It’s not on the agenda.”

Putin
has also called for rich émigrés to come back to Russia. The hope is
that they will start investing in state-owned enterprises and stop the
country from hemorrhaging tens of billions of dollars a year. Gennady
Timchenko, the cofounder of Gunvor, one of the world’s largest
independent commodity trading companies, was among the first to return,
arriving from Switzerland last month. “Putin personally asked his friend
to come back to Russia to be closer to his roots,” said Igor Bunin, the
president of the Center for Political Technologies, a Moscow-based
think tank.

Skeptics
doubt that rich expatriates will want to live in Putin’s new Russia.
Both Alexei Kudrin, Putin’s former finance minister, and Mikhail
Prokhorov, a billionaire and former ally of the president, have joined
the opposition and now represent a threat to his power. Whether
or not the opposition can gain further momentum remains to be seen. A
few independent media outlets have been critical of Putin’s imperial
impulses, warning that his third term will result in purges of elites
and greater media censorship. But by and large, Putin’s cult of
personality has continued to grow in the 12 years he’s been in power.

Indeed,
for Putin’s 60th birthday in October, as portraits of the president
hung from bridges and buildings, an art exhibit, entitled “Putin: The
Most Kind-Hearted Man in the World,” opened in Moscow. The exhibit
featured portraits of the president petting a tiger, feeding a calf with
a bottle, and riding shirtless atop a horse. Patriarch Cyril, the head
of Russia’s Christian Orthodox Church took things a step further,
calling the former KGB agent a “present from God.”

Russian president vows in state of the nation address that Russia will not allow democracy to be imposed from abroad.

Russia's President Vladimir Putin has warned against foreign meddling
in Russian politics and criticised opposition politicians of being in
the pay of foreign interests. "Direct or indirect meddling in our internal political process is
unacceptable," Putin said in his annual state of the nation address on
Wednesday. Putin, who last year accused the United States of encouraging
opposition protests and claimed foreign governments spend money to seek
to influence elections, said Russians receiving money from abroad should
be barred from politics.

"A politician who receives money from beyond the borders of the
Russian Federation cannot be a politician on its territory," added
Putin.

The state of the nation speech is the first by Putin since winning a third term in March's election despite a wave of massive protests in Moscow. In July, Putin signed a bill forcing foreign funded non-governmental
groups involved in political activity to register as "foreign agents" in
Russia. Sergai Strokan, a staff writer for the Russian newspaper Kommersant
told Al Jazeera that "Putin's speech was telling the opposition to
think twice before they hit the streets in protest as they are now
labelled as foreign agents."

Spiritual values

In the speech that also focused heavily on social issues, Putin
promised to encourage families to have more children, create 25 million
new jobs and develop new incentives for teachers, doctors, engineers and
others. Turning to the economy, he said: "Our entrepreneurs have often been accused of lacking patriotism. "According to available data, nine out of 10 transactions by them go unchecked by our laws." He also pledged to support "institutions that represent traditional
spiritual values," a hint at even more state support for the Russian
Orthodox Church.

In August, three members of the punk band Pussy Riot were sentenced to two years in prison for performing a protest song in Moscow's main cathedral against the church's backing for Putin. One of them was released on appeal, but two others are serving their
sentences despite an international outrage over what was widely seen as
the intolerance to dissent in Russia. Putin said Russia would follow its own view on democracy and shrug off any "standards enforced on us from outside."

Putin said that on the global stage Russia's task will be to preserve
its "national and spiritual identity," adding that the strengthening of
the nation's military might should "guarantee its independence and
security."

If
imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then for the South Korean
dignitaries it was a sight to behold. On a recent visit to Vladivostok,
Russia’s so-called capital on the Pacific, a group of Seoul officials
was treated to the Russian Far East’s first Korean pop competition,
where dozens of (very Slavic) local teenagers took to a university stage
to imitate, in choreographed dance, Korean music videos they had found
on YouTube.

Girls
took to the stage in red sequinned dresses, and shimmied, as the
original Korean music videos played on a screen in the background. In
the audience, 200 of their Russian contemporaries – and the visiting
South Korean officials – erupted into applause. After years of neglecting its Asia-Pacific borders, Russia is stepping up efforts to
woo its Asian neighbours, pouring money into Far East cities such as
Vladivostok and seeking out new trade opportunities there. The change in Russia’s outlook from west to east is spurred partly by
the problems in the eurozone. But analysts say it is a change that
logically should have happened years ago.

“If Peter the Great were alive he would leave Moscow and not go to St
Petersburg but make his capital somewhere around Vladivostok. That is
the frontier,” says Dmitry Trenin, of the Carnegie Centre in Moscow. “Even without the euro crisis the centre of gravity in the world of
economic, political and military strategy is moving to Asia-Pacific
region.”

In September, Russia will host the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
Summit for the first time, before which it is rolling out the red carpet
for the other country participants, with events such as the Korean pop
competition, part of a month-long festival celebrating Russian-Korean
friendship. On the political side, Moscow is ramping up visits with Asian leaders
– Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev met seven times with their Chinese
counterparts over the past 18 months – and strengthening economic ties.
Russia and China have promised to increase bilateral trade from $83.5bn
in 2011 to $200bn by 2020. Trade turnover with Japan more than doubled
between 2005 and 2010 to $23.1bn, while trade with South Korea tripled
to $17.7bn over the same period.

The evolution is driven by simple supply-and-demand as well as
geography. Resource rich Russia can provide Asian industry with the raw
materials it needs to sustain growth, and also get them there quicker
than other resource suppliers. Raw materials typically take two to four days to reach China from
Russia, versus 23 days by boat from South Africa, notes Artem Volynets,
chief executive of EN+, the holding company for Oleg Deripaska’s assets,
including the East Siberia-based Rusal and power utility EuroSibEnergo.

“Russia has the opportunity to create Canada out of Siberia,” Mr
Volynets says. With the west in crisis, he adds, “there is a real chance
for Russia to diversify away from its dependence on Europe”.

Despite this, much stands in Russia’s way, including barriers of Moscow’s own making. One of the reasons that Russia “largely overlooked the skyrocket
growth of Asia” – a mistake that even faraway Europe and the US did not
make – was a fear that China’s surging population would move in on
Russia’s own, sparsely populated territory, says Sergei Karaganov, a
faculty dean at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics. “We never looked
for opportunities, we looked for threats.”

While the idea seems antiquated, it still holds true. Last week prime
minister Dmitry Medvedev warned of “negative manifestations” in the Far
East, including “the formation of enclaves made up of foreign
citizens”. “Not many people live [in the Far East], unfortunately, and the task
of protecting our Far Eastern territories from excessive expansion by
bordering states remains in place,” he said during a government meeting
on migration. To develop the Far East, the Kremlin will not only have to boost
flagging population numbers there but attract the type of professionals
who can transform the region from a raw materials base to a diverse
economy.

Unfortunately,
most young Russian professionals are not exactly jumping to move to
Vladivostok, especially when they can find well-paying jobs in more
established markets such as Moscow, Europe or China. Meanwhile, the Russians actually living in the Far East are not
exactly thrilled to be there either. According to new data from Moscow
polling agency VTsIOM, two-fifths of the Russians who live in Siberia
and the Far East want to leave, citing low salaries and a lack of career
prospects as the main reasons. The human capital obstacle is one Russia may be able to overcome,
especially with high-profile events such as the Apec summit, which are
bringing more attention to the region. Harder to surmount are the infrastructure issues, which plague not
just the Far East but the roads and railroads that are supposed to
connect it with the rest of the country.

“This is great saying we are going to go to the east and build in the
east, but how are we going to get there?” asked Klaus Kleinfeld,
chairman of Alcoa, at the St Petersburg Economic Forum in June. “Only
one-third of Russia’s roads in the Far East meet the World Bank’s
quality standard.”

Mr Volynets estimates $600bn is needed to properly develop East
Siberia and the Far East. While Russia’s natural resource companies can
supply China, they cannot actually get the materials there due to
bottlenecks, he says. The Port of Shanghai, for example, has an annual
of turnover of 600m tonnes, while all of the Far East ports combined can
export just 70m tonnes a year, due to the undeveloped infrastructure. For the time being, these bigger problems have been pushed aside as
Vladivostok prepares for the September Apec summit. While Russians
themselves may have reservations about the region’s development, its
partners are more optimistic, as witnessed on the sidelines of the
Russian-Korean friendship festival.

“Because of this summit and [Vladivostok’s transformation] we can
expect a real rapid development in the region, in the economy and in its
politics,” gushed Park Hyun Bon, director of the Korean Tourism
Organisation’s Vladivostok office. Kwak Seung-Jun, chairman of the president’s council for the future of
South Korea and one of the visiting dignitaries was also impressed.
“It’s like I’m travelling not to a different country but to a different
city in Korea,” he beamed.

Russia is Building Diplomatic and Military Tools to Prevent Western Resistance to its Eurasian Union

US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent remarks about Russia’s
efforts to “re-Sovietize” the countries of the former Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics have apparently touched a nerve with the Kremlin.
Secretary Clinton warned that the United States is well aware of
Russia’s intentions to rebuild its control over the former Soviet
republics via extended regional integration and institutionalization
under the benign-looking labels of the Customs Union or Eurasian Union.
She also revealed that the US is trying to think of ways to slow this
process down or prevent it (Vz.ru, Kyiv Post, December 7).

Clinton’s
explicit comments at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe (OSCE) December 6 ministerial in Dublin caused quite a stir among
Russia’s top officials. President Vladimir Putin caustically retorted
that the US accusations were nonsense. He pointed to the common
language, similar mindsets, as well as interconnected transportation and
energy infrastructures as natural factors pushing Russian-led
integration in the post-Soviet space. He even referred to the European
Union as an integration project that restrains the national
sovereignties of its member states even more than the USSR’s Supreme
Soviet decision framework used to (Vz.ru, December 10).

Other
officials followed the Russian president’s lead, including State Duma
Speaker Sergei Naryshkin, and the Duma’s Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) Committee Chair Leonyd Slutskyi. Naryshkin stated that US
interference in the Eurasian integration processes was unacceptable
(Vz.ru, December 10). Slutskyi reasoned that since the Eurasian Union is
going to become a major global player, Clinton’s statement in Dublin
was an effort to preserve the US-dominated unipolar world (Vz.ru,
December 8).

Two
essential ideas can be observed in the Russian officials’ emotional
responses. First, the Russian statements, including last year’s
explanation by Vladimir Putin during the presidential campaign, attempt
to clarify Moscow’s intention to transform the Eurasian Union into one
of the global poles of power, connecting Europe and the Asia-Pacific
region (Izvestia.ru,
October 3, 2011; Vz.ru, December 10). Russia’s envisaged continental
Western Europe-CIS-Asia axis would thus leave the United States a lesser
role in world affairs.

But
how exactly is a Moscow-led Eurasian Union supposed to become a global
pole of power? Russia’s goal is to turn this grouping into a chorus that
will sing in international forums with one voice under a Kremlin
choirmaster. The integration mechanism that Russia is willing to
implement should create the necessary asymmetric dependencies that would
consolidate its leadership position within such a union. For instance
the recovery of Soviet-era common transportation and energy
infrastructure would magnify economic and political dependence on Russia
among many future Eurasian Union members.

In the developing economies
of the CIS countries, natural gas plays the role of a public good with
pronounced social welfare effects. When delivered at low prices—as
Russia is willing to offer in exchange for often painful concessions
from its importers—natural gas has the potential to significantly affect
the political capital of the national leaders. Russia also represents a
huge market with lower standards for produced goods, making it more
accessible for post-Soviet states.

Integration
shall, by Moscow’s design, allow CIS country leaders to slightly
improve their citizens’ standard of living through Russian-subsidized
deliveries of cheap natural gas, a wider common union job market and
other social benefits that Russia’s neighboring economies are not able
to provide for their domestic constituencies alone.

With
so much economic and political influence, Russia will then be able to
promote its preferred candidates in national elections along its
periphery—and will basically own the national governments. Such an
outcome would also trigger a diffusion into neighboring countries of
Russia’s political system, which is a form of “smart authoritarianism”
mimicking democratic institutions and processes. This type of governance
forces its citizens to trade between some minimal level of social
welfare assured by the government in exchange for giving up many
individual freedoms. The emergence of the Russian-led Eurasian Union
would produce a wave of authoritarianism, slowly spreading from East to
West, until it reached the borders of the EU.

The
second idea revealed by the Russian officials’ impassioned responses to
Secretary Clinton reflects the sharp unease that Moscow feels about
Washington’s potential attempts to hinder its “gathering of the
post-Soviet lands.” The Kremlin understands well that its offers to
post-Soviet states may be rendered less attractive by alternative offers
from the West, and its constraining mechanisms may, therefore, become
ineffective if the targeted governments are supported by the US and the
EU.

Consequently,
in addition to its diplomatic moves, Russia is making significant
efforts to strengthen its military tool of foreign policy. Moscow
believes that modernizing its strategic nuclear capabilities to enable
Russia to penetrate US missile defense systems would deter the United
States from interfering into Russia’s foreign affairs.

It is also
massively funding its conventional forces, permitting Moscow to create
facts on the ground that other actors would have to accept. Currently,
Russia is believed to be the third largest defense spender in the world,
after the US and China, with its defense expenditures being slightly
over three percent of its GDP; while its combined “national defense” and
“national security” spending totals over 30 percent of Russia’s annual
budget (newizv.ru,
October 18). It plans to increase its 2013 defense spending by over 25
percent compared to the current year (Ng.ru, July 19), leading some
Russian experts to suggest Moscow is preparing for war (Ria.ru, November
17, 2011).

All
these actions indicate that the new Putin administration is
consistently building both military and diplomatic tools to support its
declared goal of building the Eurasian Union. They also suggest the
Kremlin is resolute in limiting interference from the West, willing to
militarily deter any possible resistance to the fait accompli reality
Moscow is attempting to create in the post-Soviet space.

Vladimir
Putin has said he wants to forge a "Eurasian Union" on the vast
swath of territory that used to be the Soviet Union to compete with the
European Union and the United States.

Speaking six months before he reassumes the Russian presidency for the
third time, Mr Putin said he wanted to create a global power bloc
that would straddle one fifth of the earth's surface and unite almost
300 million people. "We have a great inheritance from the Soviet
Union," he wrote in an article extolling the idea in the daily Izvestia
newspaper. "We inherited an infrastructure, specialised production
facilities, and a common linguistic, scientific and cultural space.
It is in our joint interests to use this resource for our
development."

The Russian prime minister called the 1991 collapse of the Soviet
Union "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century"
and is known for revelling in Soviet nostalgia. He denied his new
plan was an attempt to resurrect the Russian-led superpower,
insisting that the Eurasian Union would be freer than the Soviet Union
and membership would be voluntary. "We are not talking about
recreating the USSR," Mr Putin claimed. "It would be naive to try to
restore or copy what was in the past. But time dictates that we
should have closer integration based on values, politics and
economics."

The Soviet Union included 15 different republics which became
independent countries after its chaotic collapse in 1991. Three of
those countries – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – have since become
members of the EU and it is unimaginable that they would sign up to
the Eurasian Union. Georgia, a country that lost 20 per cent of its
territory in a war against Russia in 2008, would also be highly
unlikely to acquiesce. But Mr Putin said an existing kernel of three
countries – Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus – were already locked
into a new common economic space with shared customs and other rules
that would serve as the foundation for the Eurasian Union.

Mr Putin said he expected Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to sign up soon.
"We are talking about a model of a powerful supranational union
capable of becoming one of the poles in the modern world," he said.
Andrei Okara, a political analyst, said: "Putin does not just see
himself as a Russian leader but on a historical and global scale. He
wants to make grandiose political moves that will leave their mark
on history."

Say
you’re an up-and-coming superpower wannabe with dreams of dominating
your neighbors and intimidating everyone else. Your ambition is
understandable; rising nations always join the “great game”, both for
their own enrichment and in defense against other big players. But if you’re Russia or China, there’s something in your way: The old
superpower, the US, has the world’s reserve currency, which allows it
to run an untouchable military empire basically for free, simply
by creating otherwise-worthless pieces of paper and/or their electronic
equivalent. Russia and China can’t do that, and would see their
currencies and by extension their economies collapse if they tried.

So before they can boot the US military out of Asia and Eastern
Europe, they have to strip the dollar of its dominant role in world
trade, especially of Middle Eastern oil. And that’s exactly what they’re
trying to do. See this excerpt from an excellent longer piece by
Economic Collapse Blog’s Michael Snyder:

China
and Russia are not the “buddies” of the United States. The truth is
that they are both ruthless competitors of the United States and leaders
from both nations have been calling for a new global currency for
years. They don’t like that the United States has a built-in advantage of
having the reserve currency of the world, and over the past several
years both countries have been busy making international agreements that
seek to chip away at that advantage. Just the other day, China and Germany agreed to start conducting an
increasing amount of trade with each other in their own currencies.

You would think that a major currency agreement between the 2nd and
4th largest economies on the face of the planet would make headlines all
over the United States. Instead, the silence in the U.S. media was deafening. However, the truth is that both Russia
and China have been making deals like this all over the globe in recent
years. I detailed 11 more major agreements like the one that China and
Germany just made in this article: “11 International Agreements That Are Nails In The Coffin Of The Petrodollar”. A few of the things that will likely happen when the petrodollar dies….

-Oil will cost a lot more.
-Everything will cost a lot more.
-There will be a lot less foreign demand for U.S. government debt.
-Interest rates on U.S. government debt will rise.
-Interest rates on just about everything in the U.S. economy will rise.

So enjoy going to “the dollar store” while you can. It will turn into the “five and ten dollar store” soon enough.

Some thoughts

Snyder goes on to note that both China and Russia are accumulating
gold, which will protect them from the coming currency crisis and give
the ruble and yuan greater legitimacy in global trade. In Jim Rickards’
book Currency Wars, he
tells the story of financial war games conducted by the US military, in
which one of the scenarios was a Russian gold backed currency that
challenged the dollar. We’re apparently not far from that plan becoming
feasible.

The US spends a big chunk of its $700 billion a year defense budget
on dominating the Middle East in order to force the trading of oil in
dollars. Let that trade be diversified into several currencies and the
demand for petrodollars goes way down. Central banks and global
corporations will sell part of their dollar holdings, sending the
dollar’s exchange rate into a tailspin. This in turn will make it harder
for the US to finance its military empire/welfare state.

The net result: America becomes Spain, no longer able to simply whip
out the monetary credit card to cover its overspending. We’ll have to
live within our means, cutting maybe $3 trillion a year in government
largesse (including the growth in unfunded entitlements liabilities).

Cuts on this scale can’t be accomplished smoothly, as Europe is
discovering. So in this scenario the coming decade will be even messier
than the last one, with “Occupy” movements shutting down cities and
every election producing incumbent massacres. A combination of higher
prices for necessities and lower wages will demote much of the middle
class to “working poor.”

Meanwhile, China and Russia will reap the rewards of stronger
currencies, and will divide (or share) control over their part of the
world. It’s hard to know who to feel sorrier for, Americans who thought
they could depend on government programs for a middle class lifestyle,
or the neighbors of China and Russia who will see the relatively light
hand of the American empire replaced with something far more atavistic.

The statement by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that Washington
will openly oppose Russia’s attempts to re-integrate the post-Soviet
countries into a new USSR-type union has caused a stir in the expert
world. Clinton made the statement about this attempt to “re-sovietize” the
former USSR space last week at a meeting of the OSCE Ministerial Council
in Dublin, Ireland.

“It’s not going to be called that [USSR]. It’s going to be called
customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that,” she
said, referring to Russian-led efforts for greater regional integration.
“But let’s make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we
are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it.”

Armenia, as one of the allies of Russia that also has made noticeable
progress it its relations with the European Union and the West in
general, recently, is likely to adjust its foreign policy to this new
reality as well. Following Clinton’s statement, experts began to speak more definitely
about the U.S. now reconsidering its 2009 “reset” policy in relations
with Russia. The so-called Magnitsky list adopted in Washington also
evidences increased U.S. pressure on Russia. According to this
legislative act, the United States bans entry to the country to Russian
officials who violate human rights.

Russia, meanwhile, retaliated by passing a similar ban, and for greater
assurance also introduced a ban on imports of meat from the United
States. Washington is now likely to sue Russia at an international court
for breaking the rules of the World Trade Organization that Moscow
acceded to only this year. Apparently, the fight for the post-Soviet space between the West and
Russia has entered its decisive phase. Everything will depend on 2013,
when several former Soviet republics, including Armenia, are expected to
sign association agreements and agreements on the establishment of free
trade zones with the European Union.

Moscow is trying to entice these republics to the Customs Union
(currently comprised of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan) before such
documents are signed. Apparently, this was the main issue raised during
the Commonwealth of Independent States summit in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan,
last week, which was followed by the top U.S. diplomat’s statement.
Officially, no statements were made after the summit, but Russian
President Vladimir Putin must have demanded integration in stronger
terms than he has done ever before.

While some of the former Soviet states’ leaders were meeting in
Ashgabat, U.S. Ambassador to Armenia John Heffern traveled back home to
persuade the Armenian-Americans to invest in Armenia. And Prime Minister
Tigran Sargsyan went to Germany and then to the United States also for
the purpose of soliciting investment.

The U.S. appears to have decided to test the method of so-called
“investment expansion” in Armenia. This method implies a large inflow of
Western investment which would help not only transform the business
culture in Armenia, which Washington appears to be unhappy with, but
also prevent the “sovietization” of the South Caucasus country. Russia
now is still the leader in terms of investments in Armenia, but this
year the volumes of its investments have decreased.

Now it is a guessing game for local analysts as to what President Serzh
Sargsyan will decide in this respect. He is unlikely to change his
European integration course before the presidential election that has
been slated for February 18, as such a change of policy would deprive
him not only of key support from the West, but also a weighty argument
in the unfolding election campaign. It is not excluded that Sargsyan
will build his whole campaign on the idea of European integration, and
his main rival, Prosperous Armenia Party led by affluent businessman
Gagik Tsarukyan known for his ties with Russia and some autocratic
post-Soviet leaders, yields to Sargsyan in this respect.

Andrew Weiss, who served as director for Russian, Ukrainian, and
Eurasian Affairs on the National Security Council staff under U.S.
President Bill Clinton and now heads the RAND Center for Russia and
Eurasia, believes that elites in post-Soviet countries are “not in a
rush” to give their sovereignty back to Moscow.

It is obvious that in order to promote its “Eurasian integration” Moscow
will use the “stick” because it does not have enough “carrots” even for
itself, and especially that the “carrots” in the West taste better.
Meanwhile, the West seems to have set itself the task of stopping Moscow
from intimidating former Soviet republics into taking action for
reintegration. In this context Clinton’s statement means that the West
is ready to defend the post-Soviet countries from Russian encroachments.

Back to the USSR? Putin raises fears of return to Cold War days with plans for 'Eurasian Union' of former Soviet states

Proposed alliance between Russia and other nations could be 'one of the poles of the modern world'

Unified market rules to be introduced between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan next year

Putin seeking 'higher integration with the Eurasian Union'

Global power: Vladimir Putin said the new group could compete for influence with the USA, Europe and Asia

Russian
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin today raised the spectre of a second USSR
after he proposed forming a 'Eurasian Union' of former Soviet states.
The former president said the proposed alliance could compete for
influence with the United States, European Union and Asia. Russia has
already formed stronger economic ties with Belarus and Kazakhstan, but
Putin has suggested forming a group seen by some as rebuilding the
former Soviet Union. Prime Minister Putin made the proposal today in the
Russian daily newspaper Izvestia, adding that the new group should
emerge as 'one of the poles of the modern world, serving as an efficient
link between Europe and the dynamic Asia-Pacific region.

'However,
given Putin's previous views, his current proposal will be seen by many
as an indirect attempt to rebuild the Soviet Union. The single-party
socialist state ruled by the Communist Party from 1922 until its
collapse 20 years ago gave rise to Joseph Stalin and the Cold War
political conflict from 1946 onwards. During the height of the Soviet
Union, the USSR stood alongside the USA as one of the world's two major
superpowers.Nations of the
former USSR included Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Russia, and
ten other countries. The Soviet Union spread over an area of more than
22 million square km, with a population in 1991 of over 293 million
people. It expanded its borders by taking some countries by force, as it
did in 1956 when Russian troops in 1,000 Soviet tanks poured into
Budapest to claim Hungary.

But by the end of the reign of Soviet
president Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991, the end of the Cold War and
increased nationalist movements among Soviet countries brought about the
collapse of the Soviet Union. Former president Putin has lamented the
1991 collapse of the Soviet Union as the 'greatest geopolitical
catastrophe of the 20th century', adding that the new group could be a
major global player.He has
remained Russia's de-facto leader after shifting into the premier's job
due to a term limit, and his protege and successor Dmitry Medvedev
proposed last month that Putin run for president. Putin denied, however,
that the proposed alliance would signal a return of a Soviet Union. He
said: 'There is no talk about rebuilding the USSR in one way or another.
'It would be naive to try to
restore or copy something that belongs to the past, but a close
integration based on new values and economic and political foundation is
a demand of the present time.'

THE ORIGINAL EURASIAN VISION

The
concept of Eurasia, the huge area of land mass comprising Russia and
some of its European and North Asian neighbours, was first featured in
George Orwell's dystopian fantasy 1984. Under Orwell's vision of a
Totalitarian dystopia after the Second World War, the UK falls into
civil war and is integrated to Oceania, a society ruled by the
dictatorship of 'the Party'. At the same time, the USSR annexed
continental Europe and created the second superstate of Eurasia. The
novel's third state, Eastasia is made of large regions of East Asia and
Southeast Asia.

The novel
describes the story of Winston Smith, who records how the world's three
superstates are constantly fighting for the unconquered lands of the
world. Smith recounts the Atomic Wars fought in western Russia, North
America and Europe, and describes how 'the Party' referred to the
postwar reorganisation of society as 'the Revolution'. Russia, Belarus
and Kazakhstan already have formed an economic alliance that has removed
customs barriers in mutual trade during the past summer. They are to
introduce unified market rules and regulations starting Jan. 1.

Putin
said that Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are expected to join the grouping. 'We aren't going to stop at that and are putting forward an ambitious
task of reaching a new, higher level of integration with the Eurasian
Union,' Putin said. 'Along with other key players and regional
structures, such as the European Union, the United States, China and the
Asia Pacific Economic Community, it should ensure stability of global
development.' Russia has long called for stronger co-operation between
ex-Soviet nations, but earlier attempts at forging closer ties between
them have failed due to sharp economic differences.Many
former Soviet nations have looked westward and remain suspicious of
Moscow's intentions, setting a rocky path to Putin's 'Eurasian Union.'

Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, considered more Russia-friendly
than his pro-Western predecessor, has continued to focus on closer
relations with the European Union, shattering Moscow's hopes for luring
Ukraine into its orbit. Yanukovych complained last month that the
Kremlin was trying to coerce Ukraine into joining the customs union of
Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, and said that he wouldn't yield to
pressure.

Even Russia's ties with its closest ally, Belarus, has been
marred by tensions. Belarusian
President Alexander Lukashenko, whose government is struggling with a
spiralling financial crisis, has staunchly resisted Moscow's push for
controlling stake in Belarus' top state-controlled industrial assets.
Putin's plan also comes in potential competition with the Eastern
Partnership, an initiative launched two years ago by Poland and Sweden.
It aims to deepen European Union integration with six ex-Soviet nations:
Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Director of Regional Studies Center (RSC), political scientist Richard Giragosian
said elections in Russia were neither legal nor transparent. Over 90
000 surveillance cameras were installed, most of which were out of
operation, he told a press conference in Yerevan. Giragosian said the
West gave almost no reaction to developments in Russia during the
elections. “An interesting fact is that the opposition united against
Putin, but it is split with regard to other issues, and this lessens
its impact.” According to the expert, Putin will pursue a tough policy.
“Russia will try to press Armenia so that the latter joins the
Eurasian Union. The process of Karabakh conflict resolution will see
minor development, with no tangible changes, because not everything
depends on Russia,” he said. “There is also another party, Baku, and it
does not want concessions; in addition, representatives of Nagorno
Karabakh should also join the negotiations,” Giragosian added. The
political scientist believes that the Russian-U.S. relations will face a
new stage of development.

Armenia should not join Eurasian Union, opposition says

The opposition Heritage Party's Secretary General, Stephan Saparyan,
thinks that entering into the Eurasian Union will not be beneficial for
Armenia and it just has to preserve its good relations with Russia.
Saparyan says that Russia’s influence in central Asian countries is
being challenged by China while from the West; the EU Eastern
partnership program is challenging Russia. According to him, the Eastern
Partnership is already a realistic perspective, whereas Eurasian Union
so far exists only on paper. Saparyan’s opinion is based on the reality
that Armenia does not have direct borders with Eurasian countries.
Despite not having common borders with the EU, Armenia could exercise
such contact via Georgia, thinks Armenian opposition member.

In an interview with Lragir.am, head of
Modus Vivendi Center Ara
Papyan, dwelling on Armenia’s accession to the Eurasian Union, said it
is not expedient since this organization has not been even set up and
nothing is clear about it. According to him,
it seems to be an attempt to imitate the Soviet Union in a worse way.
The Soviet Union, in Papyan’s opinion, had the advantage over the
Euraian Union it had common pricing and salary systems. We sacrificed
our independence for some economic benefits. Now,
we already have suffered great losses in our foreign policy in terms of
independence. Now we will lose even more if we join the Eurasian Union
without any benefits. We need to have a clear idea that accession to
that organization will harm our relationships
with the European Union and the Middle East, says Ara Papyan.

He
goes on to say that the benefit of joining such organizations is
simplified customs procedures, but Armenia, having no common
border with it, will have to cross the Georgian customs to reach
Russia. He says the procedures will remain the same so this organization
will bring nothing to Armenia.The more members the union has, the better it is for Russia. We will just boost the number of members and lose a lot, says
Ara Papyan.

Repression
is quite possible. We are now in such a situation when the authorities
depend on Russia for different reasons. Naturally,
if they face the dilemma of choosing between the government and the
Eurasian Union, I think they will choose the organization. We have had a
lot of economic and political losses just for the sake of fawning over
someone, says the head of Modus Vivendi.

In
general, we need one thing – rule of law in politics and economics.
When there is rule of law in Armenia, capital will come, industry and
competitiveness
will develop. There is no capitalism in Armenia because it is based on
competitiveness. We have a monopoly-based half-feudalistic governance.
If Armenia is placed on a fair and competitive track, it will develop.
If rule of law is established, Armenia will
develop, if not, Armenia will never develop, neither within the
European Union nor the Eurasian Union, said Ara Papyan.

Relations With West Expected to Define Armenia’s Future Ties With Russia

Experts began to talk about the likelihood of a revision of military
cooperation between Yerevan and Moscow after Armenia became the only
South Caucasus republic with a Russian military presence.
This happened after Russia refused to further use the Gabala radar
station in Azerbaijan. Not long before the 2008 armed conflict with
Georgia Russia also withdrew its basis from Akhalkalaki.

Armenia relies on Russia for security and hosts a Russian military base
in Gyumri. The frontier troops of the Federal Security Service of Russia
also protects Armenia’s borders with Turkey and Iran. Besides, Armenia
is a member of the Russia-led defense pact, Collective Security Treaty
Organization, comprised of six former Soviet republics.

Still, many Western politicians are puzzled how Armenia, a country with
such close military ties with Russia, is going to integrate with the
European Union. There is even growing talk about a new scheme of
West-Russia cooperation in Armenia – Moscow takes up the security
matters, while the West helps Yerevan develop democracy and economy.

Nevertheless, the viability of such a scheme is doubtful, primarily
because of the situation in the region. Tension builds up around Iran
and its nuclear program. After Azerbaijan canceled a simplified visa
regime with Iran, engaged in diplomatic altercations with its southern
neighbor and most recently ousted the Russian military from Gabala,
Armenia remains a sole platform for a Russian-Iranian bloc in the South
Caucasus.

Yerevan will hardly want to lose ties with the West in case there is an
escalation of tensions around Iran. Once this year the United States
already accused Armenia of allowing its commercial banks to violate
international sanctions against Iran. Armenia had to give explanations
in this regard. But Armenia does not want to spoil its relations with
Iran either.

The presence of a Russian military base in its territory does not allow
Armenia to maintain neutrality in the Iran problem. It is not excluded
that Armenia will raise the question of revising the question of Russian
military presence inside its borders.

The growing ties between Armenia and the European Union, which plan to
sign an association agreement by the end of 2013, as well as the
emerging U.S.-Armenia economic ties, are possible early signs of such a
scenario. The West does not conceal its intentions to invest in Armenia
and support the aspiration of its leadership to revisit the
integration-related relations with Russia. When the West-Armenia
relations reach the point of no return, the issue of the continued
presence of a Russian military base in Armenia is likely to be raised.

If Armenia ever has to make such a decision, it will require a lot of
meticulous calculations and perhaps stronger guarantees from the West.
Yerevan may well decide to let the Russians continue to be present in
the country militarily, but demand a payment for the lease, something
that Moscow does not pay for now.

President Serzh Sarkisian and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin
met on the sidelines of a summit of former Soviet republics in
Turkmenistan on Wednesday as their governments continued to discuss
Armenia’s possible involvement in a Russian-led customs union.

Official Armenian and Russian sources gave no details of the meeting.
Sarkisian’s press office said only that the two presidents discussed “a
number of issues on the agenda of Russian-Armenian strategic
relations.” The RIA Novosti news agency quoted Putin’s press secretary Dmitry
Peskov as saying that the Russian leader spoke about “integration
processes” in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) at his
separate meetings with Sarkisian as well as the presidents of Ukraine
and Kazakhstan.

Putin referred to “our integration efforts” in a speech delivered at
the CIS summit held in Turkmenistan’s capital Ashgabat. “I mean the
Customs Union, the Common Economic Space in the first instance,” he was
reported to say.” “We will welcome all those states that will express a
desire and be prepared to join these integration structures. I repeat,
will both express a desire and be prepared.”

The Customs Union currently consists of Russia, Belarus and
Kazakhstan. Moscow makes no secret of its desire to expand this
structure and eventually turn it into a closely-knit Eurasian Union of
ex-Soviet states.

Armenia has until now been reluctant to join the Customs Union,
citing the absence of a common border with any of its three member
states. Putin and Sarkisian discussed the matter when they met in Moscow
in August. Putin said after those talks that the Russian and Armenian
governments will form a work group to explore ways of Yerevan’s possible
involvement in the bloc.

Top
Russian officials actively promoted the Eurasian Union during
visits to Yerevan this summer, fuelling media speculation that the
Armenian government is under growing pressure to embrace the idea. In a
related development, Viktor Khristenko, the Russian head of the
Eurasian Economic Commission, the Customs Union’s governing body,
visited Yerevan and met with Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian on
Wednesday. An Armenian government statement said he briefed Sarkisian on
“processes taking place within the framework of the Customs Union.”

The Armenian premier, for his part, told Khristenko that his
government is holding successful negotiations with the European Union on
a far-reaching free trade deal and plans to complete them next year,
said the statement. “The prime minister pointed out that Armenia is
interested in integration processes and regards them as complementary,”
it added.

Tigran Sargsyian said Armenia must “deepen and expand ties with the
Eurasian Union” when he addressed the Armenian parliament later in the
day. Yerevan will therefore increasingly “cooperate” with the Customs
Union, he said. The premier stopped short of explicitly calling for Armenia’s
accession to the Russian-lead union, however. He has repeatedly spoken
out against this possibility before.

President Sarkisian held talks with Putin less than a week after
hosting a summit in Yerevan of the leaders of Armenia, Georgia and
Moldova. The summit, which was also attended by European Commission
President Jose Manuel Barroso, focused on efforts by the three ex-Soviet
states to integrate more closely with the EU through “association
agreements” currently negotiated with Brussels.

Sarkisian, Putin Discuss Strategic Ties

President Serzh Sarkisian on Wednesday met with his Russian
counterpart Vladimir Putin, following a session of the Collective Treaty
Security Organization, which focused on the proposed Russian-led
customs union. According to Sarkisian press office, the two leaders discussed issues
of mutual interest in Russian-Armenian strategic relations and possible
avenues of cooperation between the two countries.

Ahead of the Sarkisian-Putin meeting a senior official in Moscow said
that the absence of a common border with Russia is not an
“insurmountable obstacle” to Armenia’s accession to the customs union,
which enjoys the membership of all CSTO member-states except Armenia. Armenia has expressed reservation in joining the union, known as the
Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEc), saying the fact that it does not
share a common border with Russia could raise problems in the long run.

EurAsEc member-state presidents met separately in Moscow immediately
after the CSTO summit. That meeting in turn was followed by trilateral
talks between Putin
and presidents Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan and Aleksandr
Lukashenko of Belarus. Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus make up the more
tightly-knit Customs Union, which Putin hopes will eventually develop
into a larger Eurasian Union of former Soviet republics.

Armenia appears to be facing growing pressure from Moscow to join the
Customs Union. It has avoided committing itself until now, citing the
lack of common borders with any of the three member states, reported
RFE/RL. Viktor Khristenko, the Russian head of the Eurasian Economic
Commission, the Customs Union’s governing body, questioned the official
Armenian rationale in an interview with the Moscow daily “Vedomosti”
published on Wednesday, according to RFE/RL.

“Many thought [the absence of common borders] is an insurmountable
obstacle. But in my view, it’s not,” Khristenko said, pointing to the
existence of Russia’s Kalinigrad exclave sandwiched between Poland and
Lithuania.
“Given the developed level of communications existing today, the Customs Union can definitely have an exclave,” he stressed.

“Of course, Armenia has very sensitive infrastructure constraints: it
has a sole transport corridor to the Customs Union passing through
Georgia. But Armenia’s strategic interest has been articulated and it
boils down to its being a Eurasian country,” added the former Russian
deputy prime minister. Khristenko discussed the matter with Armenian leader when he visited
Yerevan on December 5-6. He met Sarkisian the day after the latter’s
most recent talks with Putin held on the sidelines of an informal
Commonwealth of Independent States’ summit in Turkmenistan.

Putin and Sarkisian had earlier agreed to set up a joint task force
that will explore possible ways of Armenia’s integration with the
Customs Union. In that context, Khristenko spoke of unspecified “new models of
interaction that have not existed before.” He also told “Vedomosti” that
the Russian and Armenian governments are now working on trade
memorandums aimed at facilitating bilateral trade.

Russia has already signed similar memorandums with Ukraine,
another
ex-Soviet state which Moscow hopes will join the Customs Union.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich was scheduled to visit Moscow on
Tuesday for talks on trade and energy ties. Yanukovich cancelled the
trip at the last minute. “I think that our movement forward with Armenia
may be even more intensive than with Ukraine,” declared Khristenko.

Under the Kremlin Thumb: Pre-Election is period of deal-making – favoring Big Brother

Over the past two weeks a number of factors have most clearly outlined
the pressure Big Brother and strategic partner Russia is putting on
Armenia for not embracing the “neo-soviet” idea of Vladimir Putin’s
Eurasian Union. “If not for Russia Armenia would most probably not even be on the map.
Armenia enjoys today’s status solely due to Russia and is able to
survive again solely due to Russia,” wrote Kremlin-adjunct Mikhail
Leontyev, commentator for Odnako magazine.

The latest issue of Odnako led by Leontyev, who is viewed as Putin’s
non-official spokesman, is titled “Whither Armenia?”. Leontyev in his
article titled “Armenia enjoys today’s status solely due to Russia”
mocks that “Armenia has no alternative” other than entering the Eurasian
Union and that “its ravings about European choice are rather strange”.

Why now? Why is Russia concerned about Armenia now? There are two
reasons: first, it’s a pre-election period and, second, Armenia’s
success in the negotiations on signing the European Union Association
Agreement. The pre-election period is optimum time for putting pressure
on the authorities, and that pressure is obviously being exerted.

Various politicians and political analysts have stressed a number of
times that Putin’s idea of creating a Eurasian Union with ambitions of
becoming the European Union’s competitor and counterweight, in reality
is set to solve Russia’s “empire-worshipping” goal of completely
depriving smaller countries of their sovereignty.

Yet in April-May Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarsgsyan in his
interviews to two Russia-based periodicals Vedomosti and Gazeta.ru said
that “entering the Customs Union” which is the basis of the Eurasian
Union “is pointless to us because we have no common borders”.

Speaking publicly against the Customs Union meant opposing also
Armenia’s potential membership in the Eurasian Union; as Putin pointed
out in his famous article of October 2011, the creation of a free trade
zone – the Customs Union – would become the foundation for building a
much bigger – Eurasian - union.

The Armenian premier in his interview to Gazeta.ru even suggested that a
special status be granted to Armenia “respective subsidizing,
assistance, grants, if it is about integrating into a respective
economic area. Economic stimuli have to be created to motivate
integration.”

Theses bold sentiments faded away in August when during Putin-Sargsyan’s
meeting, Putin distantly answered the premier’s suggestion saying “we
will discuss it”. It was right after this that persistent speculations started in
Armenia’s political backstage on premier Sargsyan’s possible dismissal.
In September the sentiments changed yet once again.

During the newly-elected parliament’s very first Q&A the premier,
responding to Armenian Revolutionary Federation MP Artsvik Minasyan’s
question, said something completely opposite to his earlier statements:
“There is one absolute truth: the steps on creating a free trade zone
around Russia, Kazakhstan, and Belarus have illustrated the advantages
of that process.”

In Armenia Putin’s promise to discuss the issue was interpreted as the
last chance for positive cooperation. Political analysts did not rule
out that just as the Ukrainian premier
had set a condition for entering the Customs Union – Russia would have
to sell natural gas for $150 per 1000 cubic meters -- Armenia, as a
strategic partner, would be able to claim gas for no more than $180.

These hopes died last week when the data placed on State Revenues
official site made it clear that since July Armenia has been purchasing
gas for $244, rather than the officially announced $180. This
confirms radical opposition Armenian National Congress MP Levon
Zurabyan’s claims that “the government has been hiding the price-hike in
gas tariffs” not to create tensions among public prior to the
presidential elections.

At the National Assembly’s Q&A during the previous four-day session
Zurabyan raised a point that the government had been paying the added
gas tariff by selling shares of ArmRusGasArt stock, which is 20 percent
owned by Armenia. It has been speculated that the government sold its
share for $157.5 million. Zurabyan asked the prime minister whether this
information was accurate.

Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Armen Movsisyan answered the
question saying that “negotiations are in process with Russia over the
gas tariffs, and as soon as they are completed people will be informed”.
But before anyone was “informed” the damaging news emerged on the State
Revenues site. This latest “property for gas” deal has once again pointed out the truth
in Leontyev’s commentary when he writes that Armenia put herself “in
total dependence” of Russia.

The tradition of such resource for security trades was first set prior
to the urgent presidential elections of 1998, when 45 percent of
ArmRusGazArt company share was given to Russia as compensation for
natural gas, then prior to the 2003 election a whole package was given
by a “property for gas” deal which included five major entities, and
after the election Sevan-Hrazdan cascade was given away as a payback for
$25 million worth of atomic fuel supplied to Metsamor Nuclear Power
Plant.
In 2007 and 2008 the communication field and the railways were
sacrificed for the 2007 and 2008 parliamentary and presidential
elections, as well as Hrazdan Hydro Power Plant’s fifth energy block –
Iran back then was offering much more favourable purchase terms than
Russia.

Hrazdan’s fifth block was given away in 2007 for gas subsidy – back then
Russia, again, had raised the tariff 2.5 times and in order to ease the
social tension the Armenian government subsidized the gas price for
two years, and did it by selling the energy block for $60 million cash
and the remaining $189 million as payment for the subsidy. Nonetheless,
the gas tariff underwent a drastic 40-percent hike in 2009.

“This is the consequence of a short-sighted policy, which continues up
until now and will keep damaging us. And this kind of short-sighted
policy will ultimately lead us to entering the Eurasian Union which is
potentially dangerous to us from several perspectives,” former foreign
minister, MP Alexander Arzumanyan told ArmeniaNow.

While messages and reminders are voiced by Russia on different levels on
Armenia’s status as its “outpost”, Armenia is expecting Putin’s visit
which has been postponed three times since late September. Political
analysts assume it is being postponed “because of attempts to come to
certain agreements”.

Armenia cannot sign a far-reaching Association Agreement with the
European Union if it joins the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and
Kazakhstan, a spokeswoman for Catherine Ashton, the EU foreign policy
chief, said on Friday.

“We are currently negotiating an Association Agreement together with a
Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade part,” the official, Maja Kocijancic,
told RFE/RL in Brussels. “Armenia is free and sovereign to enter into
any agreement, including agreements with third countries. Armenia’s
membership in a free trade agreement with a third country does not
contradict the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA)
negotiations with the EU.”

“But if Armenia were to join any customs union, this would not be
compatible with concluding a bilateral Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade
Agreement between the EU and Armenia. Because a customs union has a
common external trade policy and an individual member country no longer
has sovereign control over its external trade policies,” Kocijancic
stressed.

The Armenian government appears to be facing growing pressure from
Moscow to seek membership of the Russian-led trade bloc which President
Vladimir Putin hopes will eventually grow into a Eurasian Union of
former Soviet republics. Putin and President Serzh Sarkisian are thought
to have discussed the matter during talks held this year. Their most
recent meeting took place in Moscow on Wednesday.

Neither Sarkisian nor other Armenian officials have explicitly
pledged to make their country part of the Customs Union in their public
statements made so far. The authorities in Yerevan seem more
enthusiastic about signing the Association Agreement that would
significantly deepen Armenia’s ties with the EU. They have repeatedly
expressed hope that the ongoing association and free trade talks with
Brussels will be concluded next year.

Kocijancic emphasized Yerevan’s declared strong commitment to the
DCFTA. “You know that we had a [meeting of the EU’s] Cooperation Council
with Armenia just a few days ago and at that meeting Armenia confirmed
its commitment to negotiations on the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade
Agreement,” she said. President Sarkisian gave similar assurances to European Commission
President Jose Manuel Barroso when they met in Yerevan on December 1. He
said he “reaffirmed our determination to develop and deepen Armenia-EU
cooperation.”

The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on Tuesday
approved the next tranche of the loan for Armenia amounting to $51.4
million, thus bringing the total amount of credit released to Armenia to
$324.4 million. The three-year $408.7 million project for Armenia was
approved in 2010.

Through its representative in Yerevan the IMF, in fact, endorsed the
policy of the Government of Armenia, noting only that there are still
problems, especially related to venture business and attraction of
investments in the country. He also hinted at the fact that officials in
Armenia still take bribes from businessmen.

Foreign investments in Armenia this year have fallen by 35 percent, only
the Canadian and Swiss capitals have increased their share. However,
these capitals have been invested exclusively in the mining sector, and
it provided grounds for concerns among Armenian experts, who argue that
the West has intentions to turn Armenia into a country for raw material
supply.

The United States apparently wants to offset this trend by stimulating
high-tech sectors. At Stanford University in California within the
framework of the ArmTech 2012 congress attended by Prime Minister Tigran
Sargsyan, the Armenian government and the Intel Company signed a
memorandum on establishing a research center in Armenia. A memorandum on
the establishment of a plant in Armenia producing integrated circuits
was signed with the Corparacion America company.

U.S. Ambassador to Armenia John Heffern welcomed the participants of the
Congress and said that the U.S. Department of Commerce, using a range
of data of UNESCO, has published a study according to which Armenia is a
leader among post-Soviet countries by the number of applications for
patents for different inventions. The ambassador expressed hope that
these inventions will find good use in humanitarian and commercial
organizations.

Russia apparently has decided to “retaliate” to the West’s offensive
with a “credit counter-attack”. The Eurasian Development Bank (EDB) is
due to consider a loan of $100 million for the North-South transport
corridor in Armenia. This was announced in Yerevan on December 11 by EDP
Board Chairman Igor Finogenov. “We are considering the possibility of
funding one of the components of the corridor together with the Asian
Development Bank,” he explained.

The EDB has also received a preliminary application for funding
exceeding $100 million for the modernization of Armenia’s chemical
giant, Nairit. It is not excluded that Russia will provide these sums.

Armenia is likely to accept both “rival” credits, as its government
needs money to cover the growing external debt and prevent a social
rebellion in the country. Judging by the reduction of investments during
this year, the government prefers borrowing and preventing foreign
capital from entering Armenia. In this sense the flow of investments
from the United States may change the situation in the country.

East or West?: Armenia at Geopolitical Crossroads Ahead of 2013 Election

An agreement on visa regime facilitation for citizens of Armenia
traveling to European Union-member countries is due to be signed in
Brussels today, December 17. Armenia has waived the visa requirement for
citizens of EU countries who will travel to this South Caucasus
republic after January 1. And this is in the case when Europe and Russia
are unable to agree on visa facilitation.

The end of the year has proved rich for Armenia in terms of visits of
European officials and activation of U.S. policies. Late last week
Yerevan hosted a troika of top diplomats of EU-member countries – the
foreign ministers of Sweden, Poland and Bulgaria, Carl Bildt, Radoslaw
Sikorski and Nikolay Mladenov, respectively.

Welcoming the ministers in Yerevan, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan
stressed the importance of deepening cooperation between the countries
within the framework of the Eastern Partnership program. According to
the parties, Armenia-EU relations are developing intensively. They also
noted that Armenia has made good progress in negotiations on the
Association Agreement, and the negotiations on agreement on the
establishment of a deep and comprehensive free trade area have proceeded
successfully. These agreements could be signed as early as in November
2013.

Polish FM Sikorski highlighted the importance of the February 18
presidential election in Armenia. “The election process, we believe,
must rule out even the slightest possibility of formulating any
accusation. This is very important from the point of view of the Eastern
Partnership summit due to be held in Vilnius, Lithuania, next
November,” he told a joint news conference of the three diplomats and
Armenian Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian in Yerevan on Friday.

The visit of the EU diplomatic troika overlapped with the visit of the
State Secretary of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of
Switzerland, Yves Rossier. The Swiss diplomat said that Switzerland
considers it important to develop mutually beneficial cooperation with
Armenia. He discussed with Armenian leadership the possibility of
expanding areas of cooperation and exchanged views on cooperation within
international organizations.

Simultaneously, at the December 15 special convention of his ruling
Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) that formally nominated him for
reelection, President Sargsyan unveiled his election manifesto in which
as priorities he mentioned the following: strengthening allied relations
between Armenia and the Russian Federation and implementing programs to
enhance strategic cooperation, development and expansion of friendly
partnership with the United States, continued policy of rapprochement
with Europe, strengthening of relations with the European countries.

In other words, Sargsyan is not going to get off the course of so-called
complementarity”, but will deepen the foreign-policy “diversification” as far as it is possible.
Russia does not seem to be quite satisfied with this course, and it is
not a coincidence that the end of 2012 has also brought the news of
Russian monopoly Gazprom planning to raise the price of natural gas for
Armenia.

Russia’s prime minister, leader of the ruling United Russia party Dmitry
Medvedev sent a message to the RPA convention delegates, warning that
the decisions of the convention would “have an impact on the future of
the country and, therefore, on the Armenian-Russian relations that have a
nature of strategic partnership.” Perhaps he expected Sargsyan to
include more categorical statements about relations with Russia in his
election program.

For his part, in his message of greeting to the RPA gathering, President
of the European People’s Party (EPP) Wilfried Martens confirmed full
trust in Sargsyan, describing his reform agenda as the only credible
agenda for the implementation of “significant and sustainable changes”
in Armenia.

”We are all Europeans. Armenia belongs to Europe. We share the same
heritage, and, therefore, the same fate. Due to the Armenian president
and prime minister’s works, the RPA has proved to be the leader for
changes. I have no doubt that after two months the Armenian people will
make the right choice to have consolidated democracy and subsequent
changes in the country,” the EPP leader added.

And in the White House, Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan, who was
on an ‘innovative’ visit to the United States, was received by U.S.
Vice President Joe Biden. Meanwhile, Armenia was visited by U.S. Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
Thomas Melia. During his meeting with the Armenian president the sides
pointed out the importance of the process of democratic reforms in
Armenia, and efforts aimed at ensuring the rule of law. It was
emphasized that the development of Armenia is impossible without serious
steps in this direction. Apparently, Washington intends to support
Armenia’s “decisive steps”.

Monday sees the start of two-day consultations in Yerevan between major
establishment parties of several former Soviet countries devoted to the
discussion of the idea of forming a Eurasian Union – a Russia-led
re-integration project for former Soviet space.
Taking part in the events are Russia’s United Russia party, the
Ukrainian Party of the Regions, Kazakhstan’s People’s Democratic Nur
Otan Party, representatives of the Parliament of Belarus, as well as two
Armenian parties – the ruling Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) and
Prosperous Armenia.

Participants of the forum are expected to hold consultations on a new
platform for strengthening ties among political parties of the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) member countries.

But President Serzh Sargsyan, the leader of the RPA, will not be
attending the meeting as on November 11 the Armenian head of state went
on a three-day official visit to France, where he was due to meet with
French President Francois Hollande, as well as the French prime
minister, speaker of parliament and head of the Senate. In Lyon Sargsyan
is due to meet with representatives of the Chamber of Commerce and the
business community of France.

Perhaps the overlapping of the two events is not a coincidence and the
Armenian president purposely planned it so as not to be attending
personally a Eurasian event hosted by the Armenian capital. Recently,
Armenian leaders have demonstrated a clear commitment to Europe. Despite
assurances from the Russian side that the Eurasian and European
directions are not in conflict, Armenian leaders have avoided meetings
that might be construed as Armenia’s consent to reintegrate into
post-Soviet space.

As Zbigniew Brzezinski, a leading geo-strategist and former adviser to
U.S. President Jimmy Carter, stated in a recent media interview, no one
wants to join the Eurasian Union, because it is just a whim of Putin’s
Russia. In Armenia they seem to understand it all too well.

In late November Armenia is due to host a meeting of leaders of the
European People’s Party (EPP) in EU Eastern Partnership Program member
countries, and President Sargsyan is certain to take part in that
gathering. Among the guests attending the EPP meeting in Yerevan will be
EPP President Wilfried Martens, (outgoing) President of Georgia Mikheil
Saakashvili, Moldovan Prime Minister Vlad Filat as well as European
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso. The goal of the gathering will
be discussing issues of regional European integration.

The Armenian authorities have not yet announced their intention to join
the European Union and the matter now only concerns an Association
agreement. But opinions are already being voiced on some world press
pages that it is necessary to give some former Soviet republics,
including Armenia, a prospect of becoming members of the European Union.
This is what is being actively discussed in the case with Georgia and
Moldova. But Ukraine, Armenia and Belarus are not forgotten either.

Membership in the EU is a very complex process, but even the declaration
by Armenia and other countries of their intent to join the EU could by
itself end the senseless struggle with the yet non-existing Eurasian
Union. In May 2013, Armenia will take up the rotating six-month chairmanship of
the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Perhaps that’s why
Armenia has decided to speed up negotiations on its agreement with the
EU on a free economic zone and complete them in 2013 and not in 2014 as
originally planned.

Apparently, Armenia is afraid that it will be too insistently invited to
the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. During a meeting
between President Sargsyan and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in
Moscow in August, the Russian leader said that he treated with
understanding Armenia’s argument that it had no common borders with the
countries of the Customs Union. At the same time, Putin ordered
development of “creative options”, and one of them may be the opening of
the railway from Russia to Armenia via Abkhazia and Georgia. Georgia
has already expressed interest in the reopening of the Abkhazia railroad
stretch.

At the same time, an interesting trend is emerging - Russia is trying to
draw the so-called unrecognized post-Soviet states to the new
re-integration project. There are not likely to be any problems with
South Ossetia and Abkhazia. (Russia recognized these two Georgian
breakaway regions still in the wake of the five-day Caucasus war in
2008). Recently, the Russian State held consultations on the involvement
of Transnistria, a disputed region of Moldova. It is not excluded that
behind-the-scenes negotiations could also be taking place with
Nagorno-Karabakh.

Remarkable in this sense is that representatives of two Karabakh
parties, Free Homeland and the Democratic Party of Nagorno-Karabakh,
have been invited to the “Eurasian” meeting in Yerevan as observers.

NATO Week: Armenia discusses closer partnership with Western alliance under Moscow’s close watch

Armenia and NATO have again exchanged their “partnership” credentials
this week as events dedicated to their deepening ties were launched in
Yerevan on Monday.
Speaking at a seminar held as part of the NATO Week events in the
Armenian capital, the NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative
for the Caucasus and Central Asia James Appathurai described Armenia as
an important partner for the military alliance. He especially noted
Armenia’s considerable contribution to the ISAF operation in
Afghanistan.

Appathurai, who was scheduled to meet with senior government officials
in Yerevan, said NATO was seeking a deeper involvement in the South
Caucasus and would like to step up its cooperation with Armenia. He said
the alliance leadership was now considering ways of gaining a “stronger
foothold” in the volatile region.

“But, of course, we don’t want to impose ourselves. We just want to
offer more opportunities for cooperation. And if countries like Armenia
but also Georgia and Azerbaijan wish to take this offer, we will have
more to do, more on the menu in the coming months and years,” the
official said in an interview with RFE/RL’s Armenian service.

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen also spoke of
potentialities for developing further partnership with Armenia as he
visited Yerevan in September. He insisted that there is “no
contradiction” between Armenia’s military alliance with Russia and
closer ties with NATO – a stance shared by the leadership of Armenia, a
member of the Moscow-led Collective Security Treaty Organization that
hosts the only Russian military base in the South Caucasus.

Pro-establishment politicians and analysts in Armenia have also tried to
present the nation’s growing ties with NATO and generally with the West
(including negotiations on deeper ties with the European Union) as part
of a comprehensive foreign policy agenda that does not involve any
reorientation or otherwise endangers Yerevan’s traditionally close ties
with Moscow.

But some early signs of worsening relations between Yerevan and Moscow
suggest that Russia is watching its ally’s “flirting” with the West with
a great deal of jealousy, to say the least.
Last month Russia openly defied Armenia’s request to stop the operations
of its controversial immigration program that is said to encourage
outward migration from the tiny South Caucasus country and this
difference in the positions of the two former Soviet allies had to be
reflected in the minutes of a recent intergovernmental committee meeting
in Yerevan.

In what could be viewed as further evidence of growing differences
Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to have canceled/postponed his
visit to Armenia in September even though diplomats in Yerevan and
Moscow rushed to explain that no visit had been scheduled in the first
place. Prior to that, on several occasions, Armenia spoke dismissively
of the idea of joining a Eurasian Union, a Putin-advocated reintegration
project for former Soviet countries.

No wonder that such a position would draw an angry “analysis” from
leading pro-Kremlin pundit Mikhail Leontyev, who published an article in
October reminding Armenia about its heavy reliance on Russia for
economy and security. The “privileged” price of Russian natural gas
supplies to Armenia has repeatedly been mentioned as a major argument in
this context. Negotiations over the price of this fuel essential to
Armenia’s economy may become a further indicator of where the
Armenian-Russian relations go against the background of an approaching
presidential election in Armenia.

In a November 5 article published in Vestnikkavkaza.net, analysts
Yekaterina Tesemnikova, from Moscow, and David Stepanyan, from Yerevan,
described Armenia’s vagueness on the Eurasian Union idea as
“reasonable”.

“And the reason is not the pressure of the West and not even the hope of
receiving 1.5 billion euros in Europe, allegedly promised in case of an
irreversible movement of Armenia on the path of “strengthening
democracy.” In fact, the government of [Armenian President Serzh]
Sargsyan expects from Moscow guarantees of substantial financial,
economic and political support till the presidential elections,
including gas prices acceptable for Armenia.”

The authors further concluded: “Persuading Armenia to participate in the
Russian integration project is certainly possible, but only by applying
the so-called “soft power”, popularizing and economically justifying
the benefits of carrying out the idea of the Eurasian Union.”

The Eastern Partnership summit of the European People’s
Party (EPP)
stressing Armenia’s growing Western orientation, took place in Yerevan
last week. The summit was attended by European Commission President Jose Manuel
Barroso, President of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili, Moldovan Prime
Minister Vlad Filat, EPP Chairman Wilfried Martens and others.
At the conclusion of the Summit a so-called “Yerevan Declaration” was adopted.

“The talks between Armenia and the European Union about the agreement on
visa facilitation have been completed and the document will be signed
within a few days and will take effect before mid-2013,” Armenian
President Serzh Sargsyan said after the summit.

Meanwhile, it has been announced that Sargsyan will be participating in
the CIS summit in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan, on December 4. It is expected
that “tempting” offers to join the Customs Union of Russia, Kazakhstan
and Belarus will be made to Armenia at this summit of post-Soviet
states, but Armenia is likely to refuse to do so again. Sargsyan has
spoken about the terms of an association agreement with the EU very
firmly.

Visiting Yerevan for the EPP Eastern Partnership Summit on November 30
European Commission President Barroso acknowledged the discussions in
Armenia regarding the combination of relations with the European Union
and the country’s strategic partner, Russia. Barosso said that it was up
to Armenia to make a choice, on his part stressing that the EU wanted
closer relations with Yerevan based on shared values.

Russian Senator Nikolai Ryzhkov, a National Hero of Armenia, also spoke
about Armenia having to make a choice a day before as he visited the
country. Ryzhkov stressed that no one, however, was waiting for Armenia
in Europe with “kisses and hugs.” As the Armenian president said, after signing a visa facilitation
agreement with the EU, Armenia will be ready to start negotiations on
abolishing the visa regime. He reminded that beginning in January 2013
there will be no visa requirement for EU citizens wishing to visit
Armenia.

Before the next summit scheduled in Vilnius, Lithuania, in November
2013, Armenia plans to complete talks on the Association Agreement,
including negotiations on a deep and comprehensive free trade area,
Sargsyan said. Barroso, in turn, said that after the end of the
negotiations Armenia’s prospect will be even firmer. Among the things
that Europe asks in exchange, officially, are fair
presidential elections. Unofficially, Armenia is expected to reject
Russian integration proposals. Armenia seems to have accepted both
conditions.

“Armenia is committed to holding, in February 2013, a presidential
election meeting the highest international standards,” stated Sargsyan,
who will be one of the candidates, vying for reelection. He also thanked
the European Commission for the promotion of Armenian reform and
willingness to extend its support on the “More for More” principle.

Barroso, speaking at the Center for European Studies at the Matenadaran,
said that Europe was ready to increase its support. “I mean not only
financial support, although Armenia has already received 15 million euro
under the Eastern Partnership program. A positive process of reform has
led to the initialing of an agreement on visa facilitation,
negotiations on the Association Agreement and the Deep and Comprehensive
Trade Zone are continuing,” said Barroso.

Both the president of Armenia and the head of the European Commission
repeatedly noted that Armenia stood at the sources of Christianity and
that Europe is based on Christian values of freedom and equality. “As a
family of Christian Democratic parties, EPP can not tolerate the
violations of democratic rights, xenophobia, militaristic rhetoric, the
threat of the use of force. We cannot but be worried that Turkey, which
is seeking to become an EU member, continues to illegally blockade
Armenia. I am sure that the border must be opened without
preconditions,” the Armenian leader stressed.

EPP, established in 1976, is one of the largest and most influential
European-level political parties. The EPP includes major parties such as
the German Christian Democratic Union (CDU), French Union for a Popular
Movement (UMP), Italian People of Freedom (PdL), Spanish People's Party
(PP), and Polish Civic Platform (PO), but has member parties in almost
all EU states. It has no member party in the United Kingdom, as the
British Conservative Party do not agree with the EPP’s federalist
policies, and formed the Alliance of European Conservatives and
Reformists. From among political parties from post-Soviet countries it
includes only parties of Moldova, Georgia and Armenia. Apart from
Sargsyan’s Republican Party of Armenia, Armenia is represented at EPP by
two other parties – governing coalition member Orinats Yerkir and
opposition Heritage party.

EU, Armenia Aim to Advance Relations in Yerevan

The European Union and Armenia are
building a strong relationship based on political association, economic
integration and deeper people-to-people contacts, European Commission
President José Manuel Barroso said following his meeting in Yerevan with
President Serzh Sarkisian.

“Democratic institutions, independence of the judiciary, political
pluralism, media freedom and protection of fundamental rights and
freedoms are the lifeblood of our partnership,” Barroso stressed, adding
this had been his key message in the meetings with Armenia’s political
leaders, parliamentarians and civil society.

The European Commission President hailed progress in the negotiations
on the Association Agreement (including a Deep and Comprehensive Free
Trade Area), due to be concluded in time of the Eastern Partnership
Summit in Vilnius in November 2013.

Barroso also cited headway in the Mobility dialogue, with the
expected signature of the Visa Facilitation Agreement on 17 December,
followed, at a later date, by the signature of the Readmission
Agreement. He also commended Armenia for the good conduct of the Parliamentary
elections in May 2012, saying he was reassured by the President’s
personal commitment to address the shortcomings raised by the OSCE/ODIHR
mission.

The EU fully recognizes Armenia’s commitment to reforms and the
efforts being made, said Barroso, adding the EU was determined to
support Armenia, in particular by stepping up its assistance to the
country this year with an additional €15 million for an existing project
on the reform of the Judiciary and for an on-going operation on
Vocational and Education Training.

President Barroso stressed the EU’s commitment to peace and regional
stability, in particular through efforts to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict in the framework of the Minsk Group, and reiterated the EU’s
readiness “to provide enhanced support for confidence building measures
if the parties so wish.”

In Yerevan, President Barroso said the EU attached great importance
to Armenia as a country and to the Eastern neighborhood as a whole. He
told an audience at the National Manuscript Museum in Yerevan that the
EU and Armenia were discussing the possibility of replacing the ENP
Action Plan with an ‘Association Agenda’ – “a more focused tool which
will prepare the road for the implementation of our new Agreement.”

In his speech, President Barroso focused on the role of civil society
in the reform process. He said the EU had developed a new instrument –
the Neighborhood Civil Society Facility – “to provide additional grant
support and encourage concrete actions from civil society.” He also
voiced hope that the EU’s support to NGOs will continue through the
European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights and through thematic
programmes for non-state actors, as well as other EU instruments.

“But beyond the instruments what is important to note here is the
political will – the political commitment to work together with your
country. We believe that Armenia is a European country, that you belong
to the European family of nations and that we have everything to gain
from working even closer,” Barroso said.

“The Armenian people have always been steady in their aspiration to
have a government system anchored on European values – freedom,
democracy and rule of law. We view the cooperation with European
structures as an important factor for Armenia’s institutional
reinforcement and implementation of effective reforms,” Sarkisian told
reporters after meeting with Barroso.

He reiterated Armenia’s resolve to deepen and develop the Armenia-EU
cooperation. “We aim to complete the negotiations on the Association
Agreement, including the creation of a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade
Area, before the summit in Vilnius scheduled for November 2013 and thus
raise our relations to a new level.”

“During the meeting I expressed our conviction that it’s necessary to
deepen the cooperation within the framework of the Eastern Partnership
format. Closed borders, threats of use of force, xenophobia and racism
have no place in the 21st century. All our statements and actions become
imperfect, if against their background one of the partner countries
calls the people of another partner country an enemy. This is a
classical and disgusting example of hatred,” explained Sarkisian.

“We cannot pretend that it’s normal that Turkey, which is a member of
the G20 and bids for EU membership, illegally keeps the border of its
Eastern partner Armenia closed. This does not only contradict the simple
logic of partnership, but also violates the basic principles and norms
of international law. In Europe borders should not be used as dividing
lines,” said Sarkisian.

“Armenia has declared on many occasions that Nagorno Karabakh is part
of the European family, the bearer of the same values. Therefore, we
attach importance to the immediate contacts of EU representatives with
Nagorno Karabakh, particularly their periodic visits,” he said.

While
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and his foreign minister have
traveled around the world extensively in 2012, they don’t seem to have
played host to many senior guests in their own country during the year.
Hosting European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and
neighboring Georgia’s leader attending a major European summit in
Yerevan these days is rather an exception that proves what has been a
rule for Armenia recently.

Meanwhile, Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, the authoritarian leader
of Turkmenistan, a Central Asian country rich in natural gas resources,
has been the highest guest to pay an official visit to Armenia (November
29-30) as head of state so far this year. Critics say this situation shows the failure of Armenia’s foreign policy
to maintain balance despite assurances to the contrary from the
country’s top diplomats and political leadership.

Before Berdimuhamedov the last time Yerevan hosted a head of state was
in December 2011 when Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad paid a short
visit that had been delayed several times before that. Earlier, in
October 2011, the then president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, visited
Armenia ahead of his reelection bid in an apparent move to win the
favors of his country’s sizable ethnic Armenian community.

Even the summit of the leaders of the Collective Security Treaty
Organization (CSTO), a defense pact of six post-Soviet countries led by
allied Russia, did not take place in Yerevan despite its announcement
for September. It was preceded by talk that presidents of the member
states would arrive in Yerevan to observe the CSTO military exercise.

There are several possible reasons for presidents of other countries to
be reluctant to visit Armenia, including because the country is
marginalized in terms of its participation in major international
political and economic projects. But the main factor appears to be the
changing foreign policy orientation of the South Caucasus country.

President Sargsyan stubbornly insists on a policy of European
integration, which itself assumes reduction of contacts at the level of
post-Soviet countries. This is what Russia and other members of the
Commonwealth of Independent States can clearly see now. In his recent
comments one senior Russian Foreign Ministry official even made a
reference to Armenia as a country with aspirations to integrate with the
European Union and NATO. It is this new orientation that experts say
may have played a role in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s
“cancelling” his visit to Armenia in 2012 despite a number of
announcements made about his plans. (Official Moscow and Yerevan denied
any official plans for such a visit). Meanwhile, during the days of the
CSTO exercises in Armenia when Putin’s visit was expected the country
was unexpectedly visited by NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh
Rasmussen.

Member of the Council of the Federation of the Russian Federal Assembly
Nikolay Ryzhkov told reporters in Yerevan on Thursday that Putin was
likely to visit Armenia in 2013, but he did not name any dates. The
visit of France’s new president Francois Hollande to Armenia in 2013 was
announced during President Sargsyan’s visit to Paris earlier this
month. And 2012 would remain the year of “the Turkmen president’s visit”
except for the Eastern Partnership Summit of the European People’s
Party, which is scheduled to open in Yerevan today, November 30. The
summit will be attended by European Commission President Jose Manuel
Barroso, the president of Georgia, Mikhail Sakashvili, and others.

Still, it does not remove questions regarding the efficiency of
Armenia’s foreign policy as many in Armenia criticize the foreign
minister for taking unnecessary trips to distant countries that do not
hold out any big prospects of interesting projects, attraction of
investments or generate political interest otherwise. And vice versa, critics insist that visits to Armenia by leaders of
countries like Turkmenistan, Belarus and other “rogue” states do not
contribute to Armenia’s image and reputation in the world.

This impression could have been leveled if, for instance, Armenia and
Turkmenistan announced the conclusion of some fundamental agreement. But
no such agreement was announced, after all. Instead, Yerevan State
University (YSU) awarded Turkmenistan’s authoritarian leader with the
title of Honorary Doctor. Iran’s Ahmadinejad also received an honorary
doctorate from YSU in 2007.

EU-Armenia Trade Talks are Hailed

The European Union-Armenia Parliamentary Cooperation
Committee concluded its 13th session Friday and issued a joint statement
that touched on all facets of Armenia-EU relations, especially the
steps the two are taking in ratifying a comprehensive free trade
agreement.

Under the co-chairmanship of Milan Cabrnoch (European Conservatives
and Reformists Group) and Samvel Farmanyan (Republican Party of
Armenia), the 13th meeting of the EU-Armenia Parliamentary Cooperation
Committee carefully addressed the key elements of furthering EU-Armenia
relations. The Committee heard John Kjaer, from the European External
Action Service and Avet Adonts, Ambassador of Armenia to the EU.

The PCC discussed the negotiations for a new Association Agreement,
including a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), should be
concluded before the Eastern Partnership (EaP) summit in Vilnius in
November next year. The European Parliament and the Armenian National
Assembly in their combined Parliamentary Cooperation Committee
positively evaluated the ongoing negotiations and the connected reforms
in Armenia, calling for a conclusion of the negotiations if possible
before the Vilnius summit.

As for the regional stability and security issues, the PCC
conclusions reiterate the need for a peaceful solution of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group Basic
Principles, “stresses the importance of reaching an agreement on Basic
Principles for settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict as an
important step towards a comprehensive peace agreement to ensure lasting
and sustainable peace; further stresses the importance of creating
suitable conditions for a future legally-binding free expression of will
concerning a final status solution.”

The PCC “deplores the decision by the President of Azerbaijan to
pardon Ramil Safarov, a convicted murderer sentenced by the courts of a
Member State of the European Union, and expresses its deep concern over
his subsequent glorification after his extradition to Azerbaijan;
regards this gesture as not only contrary to the spirit of international
law but as contributing to further tensions in the region, exacerbating
feelings of injustice; condemns any provocation that would add further
tension to an already tense and fragile situation”; and

“Is deeply concerned that such acts could jeopardise reconciliation
attempts and further undermine the future development of peaceful
people-to-people contact in the region, which is a significant way to
achieve lasting and sustainable peace.”

Moreover, the document highlights the EU-Armenian common ground on
the planned opening of an airport in Nagorno-Karabakh, “welcomes all
statements contributing to the peaceful settlement of the conflict and
reminds that regarding the planned opening of an airport in
Nagorno-Karabakh, the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs have received renewed
assurances from all sides that, in accordance with international law,
they reject any threat or use of force against civil aircraft and will
refrain from politicizing the issue.”

As for the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, the document calls upon Turkey, in particular, to meet its commitments: “Believes that the Armenia-Turkey normalization process and the OSCE
Minsk Group negotiations should not be linked and supports all
initiatives aimed at facilitation of regional cooperation, thus ending
the policies of economic isolation of any country in the region.”

“Recalls the European Parliament resolution of 1987 on recognition of
the Armenian Genocide; is however encouraged by the fact that the issue
has, in recent years, become the focus of open and public debate in
Turkey itself, which could contribute to reconciliation between the two
neighboring nations ensuring their peaceful co-existence and lasting
cooperation,” said the document.

Top American Firms Call For US Trade Agreement with Armenia

A wide range of US companies doing business in Armenia,
including Microsoft, FedEx, and NASDAQ, have, in letters shared with the
U.S. Embassy, called upon the Obama Administration to take concrete
action prioritizing the growth of U.S.-Armenia economic relations
through the negotiation of a bilateral Trade and Investment Framework
Agreement (TIFA). The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), in
the interest of job-creation in both America and Armenia, is actively
engaged with the White House, the U.S. Trade Representative, the
Congress, and the Departments of State, Treasury and Commerce in support
of a broad array of practical steps and policies to promote
U.S.-Armenia economic and commercial relations.

The Armenian government has long been on record requesting that its
U.S. partners join with them in negotiating a TIFA, as well as a
much-needed Double Tax Treaty. The American Chamber of Commerce in
Armenia, through the active leadership of its Chairman, Edward Mouradian
and professional support from its Executive Director Diana Gaziyan, has
played a vital role in giving voice to the public policy priorities of
the U.S. business community in Armenia. Many members of the U.S.
Congress have expressed their support for a U.S.-Armenia TIFA, as has
the Armenian National Committee of America. President Obama, for his
part, promised, during his 2008 campaign, to foster expanded trade with
Armenia. U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Heffern, during his
confirmation process, also spoke of his interest in expanding the
U.S.-Armenia trade relationship.

Beyond reinforcing the strong cultural bonds between the American and
Armenian peoples, these corporations, in their letters, pointed out
that the creation of a TIFA platform for ongoing bilateral economic
dialogue would help facilitate a broad range of benefits to both the
United States and Armenia, including:

Improving the investment climate, identifying priority areas for growth, and building trade capacity

Addressing regional trade issues, including the special hardships
faced by Armenia due to the blockades imposed on its borders by Turkey
and Azerbaijan

Streamlining customs systems, and increasing the transparency of governmental processes related to imports and exports

Discussing the effectiveness of current programs in Armenia of the
U.S. Export-Import Bank, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and
U.S. Trade and Development Agency

Expanding agricultural trade and investment

Growing the level of trade in services, including banking, insurance, and tourism

Promoting Diasporan trade and investment, with a special focus on expanding

Armenian American trade and investment partnerships with Armenia

Improving Armenia’s use of U.S. Generalized System of Preferences benefits

Addressing any outstanding problems in the area of intellectual property rights

Translate

Mission statement

About Me

I'm not here to make friends nor am I here to talk about girls, sports, cars or music. I'm here to have an impact on the minds of young, Anglophone Armenians. I want to expose visitors to this blog to an alternative perspective on Armenology, Christianity, history and the most important yet least understood topic on earth - geopolitics. Armenians need to be proud of the fact that their ancient homeland is the origin of human civilization. Armenians need to realize that Christ was not the Jewish Messiah. Armenians must understand that Armenia belongs within Russia's orbit. I have been closely observing Russia since Vladimir Putin's rise to power. Putin is one of the greatest political figures in history. With the Anglo-American-Zionist global establishment's toxic effects all around us, Putin's Russia has risen to become the last hope for the traditional nation-state and European civilization. The Caucasus is a violent and unforgiving place. Armenia's survival as a nation in the south Caucasus is only made possible by the presence of a strong Russia within the region. Hail Russia - the last front against Western imperialism, Globalism, Zionism, Islamic extremism and pan-Turkism.